Radiotherapy quality assurance for mesorectum treatment planning within the multi-center phase II STAR-TReC trial: Dutch results.
Humans
Netherlands
Organ Sparing Treatments
/ methods
Organs at Risk
/ radiation effects
Quality Assurance, Health Care
/ standards
Radiotherapy Dosage
Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted
/ standards
Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated
/ methods
Rectal Neoplasms
/ radiotherapy
Rectum
/ radiation effects
Quality assurance
Radiotherapy
Rectal neoplasms
Treatment planning
Journal
Radiation oncology (London, England)
ISSN: 1748-717X
Titre abrégé: Radiat Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101265111
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 Feb 2020
18 Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
09
10
2019
accepted:
10
02
2020
entrez:
20
2
2020
pubmed:
20
2
2020
medline:
31
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The STAR-TReC trial is an international multi-center, randomized, phase II study assessing the feasibility of short-course radiotherapy or long-course chemoradiotherapy as an alternative to total mesorectal excision surgery. A new target volume is used for both (chemo)radiotherapy arms which includes only the mesorectum. The treatment planning QA revealed substantial variation in dose to organs at risk (OAR) between centers. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the treatment plan variability in terms of dose to OAR and assess the effect of a national study group meeting on the quality and variability of treatment plans for mesorectum-only planning for rectal cancer. Eight centers produced 25 × 2 Gy treatment plans for five cases. The OAR were the bowel cavity, bladder and femoral heads. A study group meeting for the participating centers was organized to discuss the planning results. At the meeting, the values of the treatment plan DVH parameters were distributed among centers so that results could be compared. Subsequently, the centers were invited to perform replanning if they considered this to be necessary. All treatment plans, both initial planning and replanning, fulfilled the target constraints. Dose to OAR varied considerably for the initial planning, especially for dose levels below 20 Gy, indicating that there was room for trade-offs between the defined OAR. Five centers performed replanning for all cases. One center did not perform replanning at all and two centers performed replanning on two and three cases, respectively. On average, replanning reduced the bowel cavity V20Gy by 12.6%, bowel cavity V10Gy by 22.0%, bladder V35Gy by 14.7% and bladder V10Gy by 10.8%. In 26/30 replanned cases the V10Gy of both the bowel cavity and bladder was lower, indicating an overall lower dose to these OAR instead of a different trade-off. In addition, the bowel cavity V10Gy and V20Gy showed more similarity between centers. Dose to OAR varied considerably between centers, especially for dose levels below 20 Gy. The study group meeting and the distribution of the initial planning results among centers resulted in lower dose to the defined OAR and reduced variability between centers after replanning. The STAR-TReC trial, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02945566. Registered 26 October 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02945566).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The STAR-TReC trial is an international multi-center, randomized, phase II study assessing the feasibility of short-course radiotherapy or long-course chemoradiotherapy as an alternative to total mesorectal excision surgery. A new target volume is used for both (chemo)radiotherapy arms which includes only the mesorectum. The treatment planning QA revealed substantial variation in dose to organs at risk (OAR) between centers. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the treatment plan variability in terms of dose to OAR and assess the effect of a national study group meeting on the quality and variability of treatment plans for mesorectum-only planning for rectal cancer.
METHODS
METHODS
Eight centers produced 25 × 2 Gy treatment plans for five cases. The OAR were the bowel cavity, bladder and femoral heads. A study group meeting for the participating centers was organized to discuss the planning results. At the meeting, the values of the treatment plan DVH parameters were distributed among centers so that results could be compared. Subsequently, the centers were invited to perform replanning if they considered this to be necessary.
RESULTS
RESULTS
All treatment plans, both initial planning and replanning, fulfilled the target constraints. Dose to OAR varied considerably for the initial planning, especially for dose levels below 20 Gy, indicating that there was room for trade-offs between the defined OAR. Five centers performed replanning for all cases. One center did not perform replanning at all and two centers performed replanning on two and three cases, respectively. On average, replanning reduced the bowel cavity V20Gy by 12.6%, bowel cavity V10Gy by 22.0%, bladder V35Gy by 14.7% and bladder V10Gy by 10.8%. In 26/30 replanned cases the V10Gy of both the bowel cavity and bladder was lower, indicating an overall lower dose to these OAR instead of a different trade-off. In addition, the bowel cavity V10Gy and V20Gy showed more similarity between centers.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Dose to OAR varied considerably between centers, especially for dose levels below 20 Gy. The study group meeting and the distribution of the initial planning results among centers resulted in lower dose to the defined OAR and reduced variability between centers after replanning.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
The STAR-TReC trial, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02945566. Registered 26 October 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02945566).
Identifiants
pubmed: 32070386
doi: 10.1186/s13014-020-01487-6
pii: 10.1186/s13014-020-01487-6
pmc: PMC7027245
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02945566']
Types de publication
Clinical Trial, Phase II
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
41Subventions
Organisme : KWF Kankerbestrijding
ID : UL2013-6311
Références
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014 Mar 15;88(4):822-8
pubmed: 24495589
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018 Feb;44(2):209-219
pubmed: 29275912
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Sep 1;23(25):6199-206
pubmed: 16135487
Br J Radiol. 2018 Dec;91(1092):20180270
pubmed: 30074813
Ann Surg. 2005 Oct;242(4):472-7; discussion 477-9
pubmed: 16192807
BMJ Open. 2017 Dec 28;7(12):e019474
pubmed: 29288190
Br J Surg. 2008 Aug;95(8):1020-8
pubmed: 18563786
Br J Surg. 2012 Jul;99(7):897-909
pubmed: 22539154
Ann Surg. 2005 Aug;242(2):212-23
pubmed: 16041212
Radiother Oncol. 2017 Dec;125(3):507-513
pubmed: 29050954
Radiother Oncol. 2013 Jun;107(3):346-51
pubmed: 23707151
Lancet Oncol. 2011 Jun;12(6):575-82
pubmed: 21596621
Radiother Oncol. 2014 Jun;111(3):400-5
pubmed: 24746578
Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 Jul;48(7):1380-8
pubmed: 15906120
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Jan;16(1):e13-22
pubmed: 25638548